SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Edward P. Studzinski

Last decided Oak BrookJul 2026
Decisions 4,649since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe. Over the 12 months to July 31, 2026, Edward P. Studzinski's 45% approval rate sits against an office average of 61%, a state average of 54%, and a national average of 58%. These figures are drawn from the decisions issued during that period.

Last 12 months July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Studzinski Oak Brook National
Approval rate 45% 61% 58%
Fully favorable 38% — —
Denials 55% — —
Decisions 486 — —
All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 35%
Decisions on record 4,649

SSA publishes no office- or national-level breakdown of fully favorable and denial rates. The 12 months are SSA's figures for this fiscal year to date plus the rest of the previous fiscal year; how we calculate them.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Studzinski's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Studzinski
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate (SSA's term: allowance rate) = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total decisions, which exclude dismissals.

Decision pattern

Since 2016, Edward P. Studzinski has issued 4,649 decisions. His annual approval rates have fluctuated, reaching a low of 29% in 2023 before trending to 45% over the 12 months to July 31, 2026. This recent rate is higher than his 35% approval rate across the entire record since 2016.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Studzinski's bench. Judge-specific preparation guidance requires a corpus of public Appeals Council decisions involving each judge, which we haven't built yet.

  • Bring a clean treating-physician record. Longitudinal primary-care or specialist notes spanning the disability period, with consistent symptom documentation, are typically the strongest evidence at hearing. A single month's records usually aren't enough.
  • Don't rely on consultative exams alone. If your medical evidence is built primarily around a one-time CE finding, expect detailed questioning. Supplement with treating-source statements where possible.
  • Prepare for daily-activity questions. Have honest, specific answers about a typical day. Answers that conflict with the medical record (in either direction) tend to hurt credibility.
  • Expect transferable-skills probing. A vocational expert will usually testify about jobs available to someone with your limitations. Your representative should be prepared to cross-examine.

Hearing scheduled?

Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Oak Brook hearing office

The Oak Brook Hearing Office is the most recent office on record for Edward P. Studzinski as of July 2026. Over the 12 months to July 31, 2026, the office maintained an approval rate of 61%. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on the medical and vocational evidence presented in your file.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Oak Brook

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your judge is assigned randomly. Within the Oak Brook Hearing Office, the 2 judges who decided cases here in SSA's latest file range from 45% to 81% in their approval rates over the 12 months to July 31, 2026.

Judges with similar approval rates

These active judges' approval rates over the same 12 months (July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026) are closest to Judge Studzinski's 45%. All five last decided cases in Illinois.

Rates within 5 points of each other are hard to tell apart at a typical caseload, so treat these as judges with comparable records, not a ranking. See Judge Studzinski and the three closest side by side →

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
1×
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants

Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.

Frequently asked questions